netdev - Re: [PATCH 05/14] s390/cio: rename bitmap_size() -> idset_bitmap

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <bb7e8b2f-b586-4985-930b-018035e86bcc@intel.com>
Date: Wed, 11 Oct 2023 09:28:37 +0200
From: Alexander Lobakin <aleksander.lobakin@...el.com>
To: Yury Norov <yury.norov@...il.com>
CC: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>, Rasmus Villemoes
	<linux@...musvillemoes.dk>, Alexander Potapenko <glider@...gle.com>, "Jakub
 Kicinski" <kuba@...nel.org>, Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>, David Ahern
	<dsahern@...nel.org>, Przemek Kitszel <przemyslaw.kitszel@...el.com>, "Simon
 Horman" <horms@...nel.org>, <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
	<linux-btrfs@...r.kernel.org>, <dm-devel@...hat.com>,
	<ntfs3@...ts.linux.dev>, <linux-s390@...r.kernel.org>,
	<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 05/14] s390/cio: rename bitmap_size() ->
 idset_bitmap_size()

From: Yury Norov <yury.norov@...il.com>
Date: Mon, 9 Oct 2023 09:35:20 -0700

> On Mon, Oct 09, 2023 at 05:10:17PM +0200, Alexander Lobakin wrote:
>> bitmap_size() is a pretty generic name and one may want to use it for
>> a generic bitmap API function. At the same time, its logic is not
>> "generic", i.e. it's not just `nbits -> size of bitmap in bytes`
>> converter as it would be expected from its name.
>> Add the prefix 'idset_' used throughout the file where the function
>> resides.
> 
> At the first glance, this custom implementation just duplicates the
> generic one that you introduce in the following patch. If so, why
> don't you switch idset to just use generic bitmap_size()?

I didn't want to introduce any semantic changes, but good point, why not.

> 
>>
>> Reviewed-by: Przemek Kitszel <przemyslaw.kitszel@...el.com>
>> Signed-off-by: Alexander Lobakin <aleksander.lobakin@...el.com>

[...]

Thanks,
Olek